ArticlePsychological assessment2019
Speed and accuracy on the Hearts and Flowers task interact to predict child outcomes.
Article in Psychological assessment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Executive functions as mediators of early educational disparities by SES, gender and birth month.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
- Repeated Feedback Can Benefit Seven-Year-old's Uncertainty Monitoring in a Memory Task.Journal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice · 2025Article
- A comparison of scoring algorithms for the NIH Toolbox executive function tasks in a U.S. norming sample.Psychological assessment · 2024Article
- Improvements in 4th graders' task behavior after physical activity: mediation by inhibition?Frontiers in cognition · 2024Article
- A new neuropsychological tool for simultaneous reading and executive functions assessment: initial psychometric properties.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Six- to eight-year-olds' performance in the Heart and Flower task: Emerging proactive cognitive control.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The Protective Effects of Maternal and Paternal Factors on Children's Social Development.Adversity and resilience science · 2021Article
- The early childhood inhibitory touchscreen task: A new measure of response inhibition in toddlerhood and across the lifespan.PloS one · 2021Article
- Leveraging item accuracy and reaction time to improve measurement of child executive function ability.Psychological assessment · 2020Article
- Measurement models for studying child executive functioning: Questioning the status quo.Developmental psychology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The current study tests whether accuracy and reaction time (RT) on the Hearts and Flowers (HF) task, a common assessment tool used across wide age ranges, can be leveraged as joint indicators of child executive function (EF) ability. Although previous studies have tended to use accuracy or RT, either alone or as separate indicators, one open question is whether these 2 metrics can be yoked together to enhance our measurement of EF ability. We test this question using HF data collected from first-grade children who participated in the Family Life Project. Specifically, we model the independent and interactive effects of HF accuracy and RT on several criterion outcomes representing child academic and behavioral competence. Our findings indicate that among early-elementary-aged children, accuracy and RT interact in the prediction of child outcomes, with RT being a more informative index of EF ability for children who perform at high levels of accuracy. The main effect of accuracy remained significant in the presence of these interactive effects. This pattern of findings was similar for different task blocks (i.e., mixed, flower-only) and for different child outcome domains (i.e., academic, behavioral). Our finding of an interaction between accuracy and RT contributes to a growing literature that attempts to jointly consider accuracy and RT as indicators of underlying ability, which has important implications for how EF task scores are constructed and interpreted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.